Introduction: Beyond Lynn White, Jr.

In 1967, a
brief but influential article by Lynn White, Jr. appeared in the magazine, Science. Entitled, "The Historical Roots of our Ecologic
Crisis," the essay would prove to be a watershed in religious thought
regarding the environment. White argued
that in order to successfully address the emerging environmental crises, humans
must first examine and critique their attitudes toward nature. Ultimately, the essay concluded, our
attitudes toward nature are rooted in our religious beliefs. As White expressed his conviction, "What people do about their ecology
depends on what they think about themselves in relation to things around
them. Human ecology is deeply
conditioned by beliefs about our nature and destiny -- that is, by
religion."

In his
analysis, White noted that the human capacity to wreak damage and destruction
upon the environment grows out of Western technological and scientific advances
made since the Medieval period. These
advances have occurred in a social context informed by the Judeo-Christian
tradition. White focuses his analysis
on Western Christianity, understood as both Protestantism and Roman Catholicism
together. He asserts that this Western Christianity is "the most
anthropocentric religion the world has seen". This overemphasis on anthropocentrism gives humans permission to
exploit nature in a mood of indifference to the integrity of natural
objects. White argued that within Christian
theology, "nature has no reason for existence save to serve
[humans]." Thus, for White,
Christian arrogance towards nature "bears a huge burden of guilt" for
the contemporary environmental crisis.

Needless
to say, White's thesis touched off a firestorm of controversy. While White has had his defenders, many
Christians -- including former Vice President Al Gore in his book, Earth in the Balance -- have argued that
White has missed the theological point contained in the creation stories of
Genesis, where nature is depicted positively.
Yet, for many other Christians, White's thesis clearly struck an
important chord. Many members of the Church - even before publication of White's
article - were struggling with the contradictions they saw between the doctrines
of their tradition and the ecological consequences issuing from lifestyles
based on these doctrines. The gradual evolution of an ecological consciousness
within the Church caused many to begin questioning traditional interpretations
of scripture. Today, the nature of God, God's relationship to the world,
humanity's place in the earth's complex and fragile life system, and the notion
of the salvation of the world and not just of humans are a few of the issues
open for re-examination and reinterpretation.

As with most
controversies, the truth about the Western Christian influence on attitudes
toward nature appears to lie somewhere in the middle of the two extreme
positions. On the one hand, human
stewardship of creation is a central theme in the Genesis stories of
creation. At the end of Genesis 1, the
writer concludes, "God saw everything that had been made and indeed, it
was very good." (Gen 1:31) This
scripture also describes a special relationship that God has with humans
through the imago dei, the doctrine
that women and men are created in the image of God. For centuries, many Christians have taken a positive view of
nature, and the special relationship that humans have with God, to mean that
humans are called to be wise stewards, or caretakers, of the Earth.

On the other
hand, Genesis could be interpreted as providing a justification for
exploitation of nature, without regard for the consequences of that
exploitation. In Genesis, when God
considers the creation of humans, God says, "Let us make humankind in our
image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of
the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the
wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth."
(Gen 1:26) White points explicitly to this monarchy of humanity over the rest
of creation as the culprit for a Christian attitude that denigrates the
importance of nature. This human
monarchy over the rest of creation seems implied in the Christian doctrine of
the imago dei, humans created in the
image of God.

In
order to fully appreciate the Lynn White thesis, we must also note that White
takes a very nuanced view of Christian theology. His point is not that Christianity inevitably leads to an arrogant
disregard towards nature. In fact, he
points to Saint Francis of Assisi, and the Orthodox traditions of Eastern
Christianity, as being environmental-friendly expressions of the Christian
faith. Rather, he argues that
historically Protestantism and Catholicism have permitted a blatant disregard
for the environment. On this
observation, White was at least partially correct.

By
surveying the somewhat new, though burgeoning, literature of religious
environmental ethics and theology (ecotheology), this essay will examine a wide
range of theological perspectives and ecological issues. While all valid responses to ecological
challenges will be grounded in some religious and philosophical worldview,
there must also be dialogue with the natural and social sciences, including,
but not limited to, conservation and evolutionary biology, sociology,
economics, ecology, physics, anthropology, and political science. From this
dialogical, interdisciplinary, and dialectical approach, ecological issues will
be resolved by moving from the concrete and particular to the more theoretical
and universal, and then back again.
Thus, the dialogue between science and religion is very critical for
thoughtful approaches to our ecological challenges.

We hope
that this essay will provide a helpful summary of what has been written thus
far in religious environmental ethics and ecotheology. At the same time, we also hope that this
essay will provide the foundation for a fuller dialogue between religion and
science that leads us towards a more just, benign, and compassionate
relationship with the natural world - and with one another.